Pelican Parts Forums

Pelican Parts Forums (http://forums.pelicanparts.com/)
-   Off Topic Discussions (http://forums.pelicanparts.com/off-topic-discussions/)
-   -   c (http://forums.pelicanparts.com/off-topic-discussions/474889-c.html)

Shaun @ Tru6 05-17-2009 03:51 AM

c
 
why is the speed of light independent of the speed of the observer and independent of the speed of the thing that emits the light?

Crowbob 05-17-2009 03:53 AM

Because. Just because.

porsche4life 05-17-2009 03:57 AM

Exactly!

Quote:

Because. Just because.

URY914 05-17-2009 04:05 AM

Did your 5 year old ask you that?

rouxroux 05-17-2009 04:54 AM

"What is your favorite color"?

"Blue.....no, yel...."

javadog 05-17-2009 05:08 AM

Because all of the number crunching doesn't work if the speed of light is variable.

JR

Moses 05-17-2009 05:34 AM

The measured speed of light is relative to it's movement in the time/space continuum.

TerryH 05-17-2009 05:48 AM

If we were driving our 911's at the speed of light, and then turned on our headlights.....

Shaun @ Tru6 05-17-2009 05:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Moses (Post 4668262)
The measured speed of light is relative to it's movement in the time/space continuum.

Thank you for responding after the OT equivalent of Technical's "What color should I paint my wheels" chimed in.

Can you expand on explaining the time/space continuum? Why do you think it's NECCESSARY that time runs at different rates depending on speed, and that mass increases as you go faster, and that the length of things decreases as you go faster (making these variables which, on the surface, seems completely antithetical to the human experience) all to preserve c being a wholly unique constant?

Moses 05-17-2009 06:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TerryH (Post 4668277)
If we were driving our 911's at the speed of light, and then turned on our headlights.....

Two problems;

1) Travel at the speed of light requires "infinite" energy. Travel beyond the speed of light would require "infinite-plus" energy.

2) On the space/time continuum, travel at the speed of light would require no movement in the "time" axis. At the speed of light, time stands still. "Time" is an essential component of the measurement of relative speed.

Moses 05-17-2009 06:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shaun 84 Targa (Post 4668282)
Thank you for responding after the OT equivalent of Technical's "What color should I paint my wheels" chimed in.

Can you expand on explaining the time/space continuum? Why do you think it's NECCESSARY that time runs at different rates depending on speed, and that mass increases as you go faster, and that the length of things decreases as you go faster (making these variables which, on the surface, seems completely antithetical to the human experience) all to preserve c being a wholly unique constant?

A really elegant explanation of relativity and time dilation:

<object width="560" height="340"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/QM28eErikAo&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/QM28eErikAo&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="560" height="340"></embed></object>


And another on movement beyond the speed of light:

<object width="560" height="340"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/MoTNGmlOO2g&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/MoTNGmlOO2g&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="560" height="340"></embed></object>

Drdogface 05-17-2009 06:09 AM

Good stuff Moses....I'm impressed !!

Zeke 05-17-2009 06:18 AM

There is no "Dopler" effect on light speed travel?

Porsche-O-Phile 05-17-2009 06:20 AM

What is the airspeed velocity of an unladen swallow?

Porsche-O-Phile 05-17-2009 06:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by milt (Post 4668323)
There is no "Dopler" effect on light speed travel?

There is Doppler effect observable (i.e. "red-shifting" or "blue shifting") as entities move towards or away from one another at significant percentages of c.

Carl Sagan discussed what it might look like to travel very close to c in "Cosmos". The traveler would be viewed as highly red shifted when moving away from an observer and highly blue shifted when moving towards. The traveler would have a compressed field of vision (tunnel vision of sorts) due to their own light waves starting to pile up in front of them (similar to what happens with air as you approach the speed of sound).

I'll see if I can find a video of his brief explanation (it used an example of a guy on a scooter in the Italian countryside).

Shaun @ Tru6 05-17-2009 06:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Moses (Post 4668309)
A really elegant explanation of relativity and time dilation:

<object width="560" height="340"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/QM28eErikAo&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/QM28eErikAo&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="560" height="340"></embed></object>


And another on movement beyond the speed of light:

<object width="560" height="340"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/MoTNGmlOO2g&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/MoTNGmlOO2g&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="560" height="340"></embed></object>




These are great. I'm off for the day, but somewhere between 5 and 6 minutes on the second video he says the Earth doesn't change its distance from the Sun due to the Law of Gravity. But since the sun is converting 4 million tons of matter per second into energy, the Earth would have to increase its distance from the Sun over time. I wonder what minimum mass the Sun would have to be to keep the Earth in orbit versus being pulled into the expansion of space.

Moses 05-17-2009 06:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shaun 84 Targa (Post 4668361)
I wonder what minimum mass the Sun would have to be to keep the Earth in orbit versus being pulled into the expansion of space.

As the sun's mass decreases the size of the earths orbit increases. At some point, the earth will be drawn to the gravitational field of a nearby heavier planetary mass and be drawn away from the present solar orbit completely.

Nathans_Dad 05-17-2009 06:57 AM

I liked the videos, but the guy's voice is annoying as hell!

trekkor 05-17-2009 08:10 AM

Hey! I narrated those vids... :mad:



KT :D

TerryH 05-17-2009 09:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nathans_Dad (Post 4668383)
I liked the videos, but the guy's voice is annoying as hell!

Funny... I was thinking the same thing. Not condescending, but like a 2nd grade teacher. Annoyingly melodic.


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:37 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0
Copyright 2025 Pelican Parts, LLC - Posts may be archived for display on the Pelican Parts Website


DTO Garage Plus vBulletin Plugins by Drive Thru Online, Inc.