does light travel in time?

Question

if as you get closer to the speed of light time begins to slow then wouldnt light its self constantly be traveling thru time wouldnt you be able to see the light even after you turned it off or see it a few sec b4 it was turned on just a thought any comments

Answer 1

Apparently not. Not only does the time dialation of relativity say so, I can see 14 bilion year old light from quasars.

Answer 2

No.

The speed of light is always observed to be the same regardless of the speed of the observer. That's all there is to the issue, despite popular culture's attack on the science.

So the people seeing the light, see it the way they would normally. So if someone was chasing the light from its source they would age a itsy bitsy little less than someone who wasn't going as fast just observing the light not moving.

No time travel, no science fiction. Sorry.

Answer 3

Light itself doesn't "experience" any time. The state of a photon is the same regardless of time. It is invariant with them.

As you travel closer to the speed of light, your time slows down so that 1 second to you is equal to 1 year to someone who is not moving. At the speed of light, 1 second to you is equal to an infinite amount of time to someone who is not moving.

Now, flip that around. Light takes 8 minutes to get from the sun to the earth. That 8 minutes passes so slowly for someone traveling at the speed of light that the person traveling at the speed of light will take a lifetime to reach it.

Thus, as time ticks for you and me, the clocks that photons wear stay in the same place. A photon simply experiences no time. It doesn't "get older" or anything like that. It's invariant to time.

Answer 4

Someone who keeps accelerating will see the universe increasingly foreshortened along the direction of his motion, which means he can appear to travel faster than the speed of light.

However, a second observer who has not accelerated, watching the aforementioned first fellow go by, will only see him moving at nearly the speed of light because for the 2nd guy space is NOT compressed along the 1st guy's direction of motion.

Answer 5

Suppose light came to us as results the interaction of two other moving phenomena. that would explain why it travels such a long distance is such a short time.Than you could call light massless. But you cant because light has been proven that it has mass.This was done experimentally. However its the smallest mass of the Universe. It would have to be other wise it would cause havoc to your eye balls.
So if light has mass than it would throw some of
Einstein's formulas out the window.

Answer 6

You information replaced into incorrect about all skill having mass. Radiation, or basic waves contain no mass. some human beings argue that it has an 'valuable mass' given by technique of countless the E=hf (engery=plank's consistent situations the frequency), yet it remains debated. Reguardless, basic has no mass, and it is the reason it would want to shuttle @ the speed of sunshine c. you're staggering about accelerating a partlice in course of the speed of sunshine might want to require countless volume of skill. once you're truly intrested seem @ Lorentz differences, and also you will see that the truly basic why something with mass can no longer attain the speed of sunshine.

Answer 7

At the speed of light, there is no time: it stops. But if you are on a vehicle approaching the speed of light, you will see no difference in your own physics: it is just that everybody else's clocks will seem to be running slower.

Answer 8

for that to answer we must know the speed with wich times goes by(maybe the same of that of light maybe not)We can speculate as we want about thinks we don't know as it is for time.We can say if time exists independent if matter or is the relation bettween events that we call time.in the first hypothese time would have a physical meaning in the second it would be only a relation helping in equations.

Answer 9

Light does not travel in time. It just takes time to see it. For example, it takes ~8 minutes for sunlight to reach the Earth, so if the Sun was turned off (if that was possible), then we would see light for the next ~8 minutes.

Answer 10

In the face of this universally held knowledge, Einstein proposed that light was not a continuous wave, but consisted of localized particles. As Einstein wrote in the introduction to his March paper, "According to the assumption to be contemplated here, when a light ray is spreading from a point, the energy is not distributed continuously over ever-increasing spaces, but consists of a finite number of energy quanta that are localized in points in space, move without dividing, and can be absorbed or generated only as a whole."


This sentence has been called "the most 'revolutionary' sentence written by a physicist of the 20th century."


Einstein anticipated the impact of his paper, In May 1905, before the paper appeared in print, he informed his friend Conrad Habicht that a forthcoming paper on the properties of light was "very revolutionary." From a modern perspective, at least three of Einstein's 1905 papers were similarly innovative, but for Einstein in 1905, it was only the "assumption considered here [the March paper]" that represented a sharp break with established tradition. It was revolutionary at the time and it remained revolutionary. In June 1906, the future Nobel Prize-winning physicist Max Laue wrote to Einstein unequivocally denying Einstein's assumption:


"When, at the beginning of your last paper, you formulate your heuristic standpoint to the effect that radiant energy can be absorbed and emitted only in specific finite quanta, I have no objections to make; all of your applications also agree with this formulation. Now, this is not a characteristic of electromagnetic processes in vacuum but rather of the emitting or absorbing matter, and hence radiation does not consist of light quanta as it says in s.6 of your first paper; rather, it is only when it is exchanging energy with matter that it behaves as if it consisted of them."


Laue was apparently willing to concede that in the emission and absorption process light quanta were involved, but beyond that, he was adamant: light traveled through the vacuum of space as a wave, not as quanta. Laue was not alone in his belief. In 1905, the magnitude of Einstein's departure from the sanctioned belief about light was so unsettling that his particle theory of light was not accepted for two decades.