English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

just by going by this one "fact", we just MUST be wrong.
We are all in agreement that light can't escape black holes? Ok, that's the fact. since light is effected by gravity, how do the observations we've made on our planet have any merit to the true speed of light? we are in a giant galaxy containing billions of stars like our sun. if the sun's gravitational force effects the earth so much as to whip us around it, then we must be feeling the gravity of the sun but we just don't realize it. all we really feel is the gravity of the earth. we see things fall, not shoot toward the sun. but nevertheless, it's there, and that means that it's also effecting the light we see. the speed of light that we calculate within the gravitational feild of the sun, and the other planets and the rest of the milkyway is thus only relative to this system we are in. if we go to perhaps a region of space where there are no stars, the speed of light could be a lot faster because it's not in a gravit

2007-02-10 11:35:59 · 3 answers · asked by JizZ E. Jizzy 2 in Science & Mathematics Astronomy & Space

gravitational feild.
I'm not arguing anything einstein said. I'm not arguing that something can go faster than the speed of light. I'm saying that the speed of light is faster than 186,000 miles/sec...
I'm not arguing that reaching the speed of light would take "..."
I'm not arguing that e = m.c^2
I'm just saying that our current estimation is way off. we can't even imaging what being in space is like when you're not in a solar system. so how can we make judgements about it by saying that light behaves the same way out there than right here in the sun system on earth. did anyone measure the speed of light while they were on the moon?
If light from the sun takes 8.5 minutes to reach the earth, how long would it take if the sun wasn't there pulling back on it's radiated light with it's huge gravitational pull, which keeps planets like neptune and PLUTO in orbit. lol, that was an intentional pun. does anyone out there see my point?

2007-02-10 11:44:03 · update #1

ok this is a message to jhstha. First off, don't come out saying that I obviously know nothing. that's extremely ignorant on your part. I happen to know a lot, much more that nothing. I also happen to have a masters in mathematics so your claim about me knowing nothing in this area is completely false. I know how to construct proofs. well i might add. i know how to prove directly, by contradiction, by induction, deductively, graphically, and so on. How can you think that I know nothing because of a question I asked? I'll admit that I don't know everything, that's why i ask questions. to find out what i don't know. if you asked me a million questions and i wasn't able to answer any of them, then yeah, maybe i know nothing. but you simply can't judge how much a person knows by what they ask. I asked an intellegent question and you failed to give me an intelligent answer. it seems to me that you know little of general relativity so you shouldn't have even answered my question. ok?

2007-02-12 17:26:14 · update #2

ok this is a message to jhstha. First off, don't come out saying that I obviously know nothing. that's extremely ignorant on your part. I happen to know a lot, much more that nothing. I also happen to have a masters in mathematics so your claim about me knowing nothing in this area is completely false. I know how to construct proofs. well i might add. i know how to prove directly, by contradiction, by induction, deductively, graphically, and so on. How can you think that I know nothing because of a question I asked? I'll admit that I don't know everything, that's why i ask questions. to find out what i don't know. if you asked me a million questions and i wasn't able to answer any of them, then yeah, maybe i know nothing. but you simply can't judge how much a person knows by what they ask. I asked an intellegent question and you failed to give me an intelligent answer. it seems to me that you know little of general relativity so you shouldn't have even answered my question. ok?

2007-02-12 17:26:30 · update #3

3 answers

Well, dear kid, you have obviously no clue of anything, neither physics nor maths, otherwise you would know that you are wrong. You just cannot go and try to prove things by so called logical conclusions as you do. You got to calculate. E.g. We know that light is made of photons. We know the so called energy level of light. Therefore we also know how much gravity it takes to have an effect on light. Howver, the effect isn't on light itself, buton it's beam. And that makes us taking care of the quantum mechanical effects we also know about. All that has to be considered, not just the tiny gravity from the sun. There are othe gravitational forces out there much bigger than the one from the sun. You may bet, we took that in regard when we calculated the speed of light. Besides, there are methods to measure its velocity apart from any possible influence. But you lack this knowledge. Therefore you postulate a funny logical conclusion ... the mistake is only, it isn't logical at all, what you state. It just tells you don't know nothing.

2007-02-11 00:11:18 · answer #1 · answered by jhstha 4 · 0 0

This is the core of general relativity. The speed of light is constant from any reference frame. That means that no matter how fast you're moving, all beams of light appear to travel at the speed c (186,000mps) relative to you. So If I'm going 500mph in one direction and someone else is going 2000 mph in the same direction and a beam of light passes both of us, it would appear to be going the same speed to both of us. This doesn't quite make sense to us, but the reason is that time appears to move faster from the perspective of the person who is going 2000 mph so the light beam keeps its constant speed.

Gravity cannot and does not affect the speed of light, but only its trajectory.

2007-02-11 02:33:33 · answer #2 · answered by Arkalius 5 · 0 0

The speed of light is an incident.
An incident takes a certain amount of time to occur.
time is a finite pulse that originated at the begining of the universe,the shortest amount of time that can exist.
If you try to shorten it,it goes out of existence.
To increase the speed of light would be trying to force it to exist for a period of time that that cannot exist.

2007-02-11 08:53:08 · answer #3 · answered by Billy Butthead 7 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers