2007-04-06 15:39:32 · 9 answers · asked by Zantetsu warrior 1 in Science & Mathematics ➔ Physics
the switch activates an electrical connection to turn them on
2007-04-06 15:48:17 · answer #1 · answered by Hazel 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The answer is: NOTHING. From your point of view, you will see light coming out of the headlights in front of you, leaving the headlights at the speed of light. Your question would make more sense if you said "driving the car at near the speed of light", since reaching the speed of light is impossible.
Someone externally observing you would still "see" the light from the headlights traveling at the speed of light also, except that in fact the "light" would be invisible, having been "blue shifted" (if the car is coming toward the observer) into the upper gamma ray region, or "red shifted" (if the the car is going away from the observer) into the low radio-frequency spectrum (or lower).
2007-04-06 16:03:26 · answer #2 · answered by gp4rts 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Nothing. The light from the head lights would be traveling at the same speed as the car. That means it doesn't travel two times the speed of light.
2007-04-06 16:01:00 · answer #3 · answered by Joseph W 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Your lights will come on, you will be able to see in front of you because no matter how fast you are traveling it is always relative to something else. However, the speed of light to you will be how fast the light from you / your vehicle will be traveling. However, to an outside observer you both would be meshed into one mass since you're traveling so fast. You would be traveling at the speed of light to me, and your light will be traveling at the speed of light to you.
When you Redshift you will spread out depth-wise, so that you and the light from your vehicle become one to the outside observer, just so you know.
In other words, you can never catch up to the speed of light since speed is relative to something / someone. Your light from your headlights will still be ahead of you no matter how fast you travel.
2007-04-06 16:29:27 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
its imposible to travel at the speed of light. traveling at the speed of light would make the object be in two places at once
2007-04-06 15:47:42 · answer #5 · answered by Jule 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
nicely, you may no longer force *at* the cost of sunshine. So enable's say you have been waiting to apply a particular equipment and get to, form of, 0.99999 cases the cost of sunshine. you would be conscious the easy bypass forward on the cost of sunshine. bear in mind easy travels on the comparable velocity in all inertial reference frames. So, offered you weren't hitting the gasoline and attempting to bypass swifter, you may word the easy bypass forward on the cost of sunshine. the main section it rather is to no longer think of of it as you're racing the photons. traveling at relativistic velocity isn't a good analogy to a greater classical challenge, inclusive of "in case you throw a ball at 20 mph, and your pal sprints at 20mph, does he see the ball get thrown?" nicely, the ball could exchange top, like a wave, regardless of the undeniable fact that it could in no way flow forward or at the back of him. he's in result racing the ball. you may no longer race a photon. you will continuously lose that one.
2016-10-21 06:05:20 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think it would look like a long strand of light. Maybe that explains the northern lights.
2007-04-10 14:22:16 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
When you turn your headlights on.. they would then come on... but they would not shine past the bulb itself though...
2007-04-06 15:47:27 · answer #8 · answered by dr_james_wright 1 · 0⤊ 1⤋
What happens when you ask a question with no definitive answer?
2007-04-06 15:48:34 · answer #9 · answered by Julie Y 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋