if you are traveling at the speed of light and turn on your back lights, does light stand still? shoot a ball going out of a car at 60mph when the car is going 60mph and it basically it falls straight down.
-
You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.
speed of light
- Thread starter Poki
- Start date
Mole
Permabanned
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2008
- Messages
- 20,282
It is impossible to travel at the speed of light because our mass becomes infinite.
And no matter where the light originates, it always travels at the same speed, the constant speed of light, "c".
so there is no light barrier
so a light barrier doesnt exist similiar to a sound barrier? we already partially broke the light barrier and it produces a light cone similiar to a sound cone. what happens to mass at that point?
1487610420
Permabanned
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2009
- Messages
- 6,418
considering relative pov might help.
mystik_INFJ
Permabanned
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2016
- Messages
- 174
While that is true, there is a real example of something moving faster than light in space. And that is...*drum rolls* space itself. At the edges of the seen Universe the galaxies are already moving away from us faster than the speed of light. We still see their light as it was towards the beginning of the Universe.
However, as they move farther, you see the red shift. The red shift increases until the light simply fails to reach the observer. Our neighbourhood will turn dark once the galaxies around us have moved far enough.
To answer your question, yes an no. Light would appear to stand still if looked at from the object (traveling itself at the speed of light). But it would also appear to be moving away from the object if looked at from a roadside view. From the object itself the light would appear to stretch to infinity frozen in time. Einstein was right. Everything is relative. The entire space-time.
BlueScreen
Fail 2.0
- Joined
- Nov 8, 2008
- Messages
- 2,668
- MBTI Type
- YMCA
I believe a guy named Albert asked a similar question about 110 years ago and realised how ridiculous the universe would be if light did stand still, especially seeing there are other parts of the universe that move at a high speed relative to us.
For reality to be normal in each place, the speed of light "c" had to not depend on the speed of the viewer. So light will move at c, whether you are sitting in the car or watching it pass. However, because this creates inconsistencies when you add up the speeds, Albert predicted that relatively space and time would be different for a person in the car compared to a person watching it pass.
Not for reality to be normal, but for us to understand. I understand relitivity...and speed makes perfect sens based on a wave as it travels from object to object, not itself. But its note JUST a wave. I still believe we havnt even touched the surface. If we were blind would speed of sound be fastest thing possible?
We have successfully broken speed of light but dont understand. Entanglement is one example. Another is speed of light in water via nuclear reactions.
BlueScreen
Fail 2.0
- Joined
- Nov 8, 2008
- Messages
- 2,668
- MBTI Type
- YMCA
Should I have said our normal or same behavior as here?
I dont believe in limitations for the sake of theory to work
BlueScreen
Fail 2.0
- Joined
- Nov 8, 2008
- Messages
- 2,668
- MBTI Type
- YMCA
I don't believe theories are exact and indisputable either. I even question whether logic is a limiting tool that people use blindly without truely understanding its place in things.
I was just pointing out where Einstein got from the question the OP asked. Speed was relevant because there is an inconsistency if you add it up classically. Normal was relevant because the post above mine was suggesting light from the car stops and makes streaks, so by that logic you'd have planets where everything is streaky just because the planet moves fast relative to us (i.e. freaking strange as opposed to normal
)
1487610420
Permabanned
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2009
- Messages
- 6,418
Abendrot
one way trip
- Joined
- Sep 2, 2016
- Messages
- 600
- MBTI Type
- IntJ
- Enneagram
- 85X
- Instinctual Variant
- sx
We have not broken the speed of light. Nothing can break the speed of light. Entanglement doesn't count as breaking the speed of light, because it does not transfer any useful information. The speed of light in water via nuclear reactions is also not breaking of the speed of light. It's merely light that is going faster than it normally would be able to in that medium. It is not actually breaking the absolute speed of light.
About the flashlight question: it's really complicated, and not just a "v = 1c - 1c = 0 therefore light stands still." You have to do a Lorentz transform like this: 22. Lorentz Transformation - Example Problem - YouTube
You're going get some strange answers that are going to differ in seemingly impossible ways depending on your frame of reference, and it's going to get stranger as the velocity of the spaceship approaches 1c. But you'll never reach the speed of light.
Mole
Permabanned
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2008
- Messages
- 20,282
What is fascinating is that we take our size for granted, but we have discovered the very small and the very large with microscopes and telescopes, and we have discovered that the very small, and the very large, and our size, are very different.
However because we take our size for granted, we think the very large and the very small have the same qualities as our own size.
The larger problem is what we take for granted. We take so much for granted, from our language, our manners and mores, our ideology, power relations, our way of thinking, our way of perceiving. And so much of what we take for granted is simply parochial.
The Ancient Greeks discovered that stepping outside the taken for granted is ecstasy (exstasis).
So we might say that ecstasy is a call from our deepest self to step outside the taken for granted.
Would you care to step outside with me for a while?
However because we take our size for granted, we think the very large and the very small have the same qualities as our own size.
The larger problem is what we take for granted. We take so much for granted, from our language, our manners and mores, our ideology, power relations, our way of thinking, our way of perceiving. And so much of what we take for granted is simply parochial.
The Ancient Greeks discovered that stepping outside the taken for granted is ecstasy (exstasis).
So we might say that ecstasy is a call from our deepest self to step outside the taken for granted.
Would you care to step outside with me for a while?
cool question.
i would say that it would stand still, but it would also create a trail if it was constantly emitted. like tossing a bunch of things out the car window.
i guess it would be invisible to outside observers because it wouldn't make it past their corneas.
but it would be visible to an observer if they were inside the emission.
lol
Mole
Permabanned
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2008
- Messages
- 20,282
The speed of light tells us about the nature of time and space. And rather than a Newtonian time and space, we now know we live in an Einsteinian time and space.
What is interesting is that due to our size, the world appears to us to be a Newtonian time and space.
This is the general problem of parochialism.
And many of the issues we discuss here are dogged by parochialism.
But worse, we belong to a culture that is proud of its parochialism and encourages it.
ToniTheSlut
New member
- Joined
- Sep 10, 2016
- Messages
- 24
- MBTI Type
- ENTP
If I put a flashlight under my nose. I will see the light, that travels faster than I can comprehend. But the light is bent. And is not as bright when it reaches the ceiling as when I point the flashlight at the ceiling directly. In this case, light )constant) can have a lifespan. Matter traveling quickly has a different life span, though the two can be related, in theory. Time frames.
Obfuscate
Permabanned
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2016
- Messages
- 1,904
- MBTI Type
- iNtP
- Enneagram
- 954
- Instinctual Variant
- sx/sp
i think you have more or less covered the bases here...
generally speaking, i would say that parochialism impedes people from reaching their long term goals.
in my field, consultants and teachers encourage students and staff to adapt to various circumstances. it would be nice to rely on a fixed framework of procedures, principles, and tools, but the real world will eventually throw you a curve ball that requires a novel solution. to understand the environment as you move through time and space, you must engage in an ooda loop.
moreover, as various cultures intersect, the global population rises, and people need to depend on outside resources, it's becoming more commonplace to understand greater social contexts.
where i live, it's better than it ever has been. however, our culture has more work to do, especially in terms of education. near me, mandatory education rivals that of some third world countries. the biggest reason general awareness exceeds that baseline is that multicultural understanding has become essential for business.
Similar threads
